Department of Political Studies Research Proposals: Requirements

The requirements of research proposals vary depending on the level of research as well as the field of study. A proposal for an Honours Independent Project, a Masters mini-thesis or a PhD dissertation will obviously differ.

1. General requirements

Yet there are basic and general requirements applying to all proposals. The following is a check-list:

1.1. Title: The proposal should have an appropriate title.

1.2. Problem statement and research question: The proposal should clearly and precisely state the research question to be addressed.

Also identify the type of question and the type of answer that will be sought:

(i) Descriptive or empirical questions try to establish the relevant facts about something. We want to know what happened, as in the question How did the Americans withdraw from Vietnam? (ii) Explanatory questions try to explain the causes of something, for example, Why did the Americans withdraw from Vietnam? What are the causes of World War I? or Why was the ANC unbanned in South Africa in 1990? (iii) Evaluative questions evaluate something according to a set of ethical, moral or philosophical principles. For example: According to Just War-doctrine, was the armed struggle in South Africa a just war? Is X good or not? (iv) Conceptual questions seek to clarify concepts, such as, "What is the meaning of the word genocide? (v) A literature review identifies and assesses the existing literature about a question. These questions may be descriptive, causal, evaluative or conceptual. How have scholars studied something? What are the main answers? Do these approaches and answers contain gaps, strengths, weaknesses, etc?

The proposal may formulate an anticipated answer to the research question. In some cases, this may take the form of a research hypothesis.

1.3. Research Design: The proposal should account for how the question will be addressed.

How will you structure your answer to the question? You may choose to do a critical analysis; a literature review; textual analysis; case study; comparison; etc

If you choose to do a theoretical case study (for example), the intent is to use a theory to guide your discussion of a case and to use the resulting conclusions about the case to develop theory.

Should you choose a comparative design, you will have to decide whether the comparison is of two cases, a cluster of cases or many cases.

If you review literature, there are different structures for doing so.

The options are many. But your choice should help you answer your question.

1.4. Methodology: The proposal should identify the sources of evidence that form the basis of your answers. How are you treating your evidence or material so that your answers become reliable?

In addressing an empirical question, for example, your answers should use different sources of evidence. Scholars usually try to involve three different sources of evidence among primary documents, secondary documents; interviews and/or oral history; visual material; etc.

Dissertations based on a literature study or of a conceptual and theoretical nature will not require a similar methodology.

1.5. Literature survey: Proposals should include an adequate literature survey both to indicate sufficient background knowledge for the purposes of the proposed study and in order to motivate the choice of topic.

1.6. Research ethics: Research involving human subjects (e.g. interviews, surveys etc) is subject to the UCT Code for Ethics in Research and requires ethics approval. A proposal should identify potential research ethics issues (e.g. informed consent, confidentiality etc) and indicate how these will be dealt with in the project.

1.7. Limitations: The proposal should include an account of the limitations of the proposed study both in practical and academic terms. This may involve differentiation of the study from related and similar but different projects (what your thesis will not attempt to do).

1.8. Draft chapter outline: The proposal should include a draft outline of the structure of the eventual thesis. Ideally this should logically arise from the account of the topic, research question and design.

1.9. Working programme: The proposal should indicate the anticipated time spent on different parts of the research and writing process. Identify your deadlines and targets. 1.10. Bibliography: The proposal should include a core and/or working bibliography.

2. COMMON PROBLEMS

2.1. The proposal is too ambitious or unmanageable. You only have limited time to complete the project: can you complete the project in the available time? Do not propose something that will take 5 years to complete when you have 5 weeks; for example, propose to do a PHD in your Honours Independent Project. Narrow is better than wide.

2.2. The proposal deals with too many things. Academic work usually is judged by whether one thing is fully and properly explained, not by how many things you are studying superficially. Depth is better then breadth.

2.3. You cannot find a person in Political Studies or even UCT who knows anything about your subject. This isolates you, and often leads to failure. You need to work with someone who knows quite a lot about your subject and methods. One supervisor is better than none.

2.4. References: The proposal should make correct use of references; if you are unfamiliar with UCT-rules; see the Faculty Handbook on Citation and Related Matters. The department also uses Turnitin to check for similarity.